If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

Something else I keep coming back to: If the Pacers just can't bare to pay Roy this much because of TEAM SALARY concerns, why on earth wouldn't you dump Danny Granger to keep Roy? I don't see any reason why they can't just keep them both, but if for some reason they feel it's too much money combined, you should dump the small forward to keep the center. It's just common sense to me.

not being sarcastic, but the reason you keep Danny and not Roy is because Danny is a much better player than Roy. Danny is a guy that can give you 25 night in and night out. Roy is a guy that gives you 15 and 9 at most. You may disagree that Danny is better or not, but that is the/a reason for keeping Danny and not Roy.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

You jest but signing and then trading him at some point still would at least net something for the Pacers.

I was only jesting about trading him immediately after signing him. Yes, I think you could match and trade him in a year if that's what they wanted to do. He'd still bring in good value, and at least you wouldn't lose him for nothing.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

If they go 8-2 it means that SOMEONE has done SOMETHING good enough to go 8-2. You can't picture what that is, but it would have to be something. Those game winning plays, game winning stat lines, would quickly erase fan anger.

I didn't say sell tickets if you are going for the "fans didn't support winning last year" angle because frankly that angle doesn't support paying Roy. If they aren't coming regardless then save the cash for certain.

As for paying Roy there is no way in the world the fanbase would ever react poorly to a 2-8 start with Roy going 8 ppg, 6rpg, 1 blk per game as a central factor in the 8 losses under his new $14m deal. The fans would love it and would never, ever whisper things like "bust" or "bad deal".

So then your real argument is you're assuming that we'll immediately rebound from his loss and have a team as good or better than the 2012 team. That is HARDLY a given. As is your worst case scenario with Roy staying.

How I miss those days of JO and Tinsley love later in their Pacers career, or the sweet sounds of affection they sang out every night when they heard the names of Croshere or Bender mentioned.

JO and particularly Tinsley were disliked for more reasons and circumstances than mere performance issues, but that's a whole other thread I don't want to even read, let alone participate in, right now.

Bender was injuries first, performance second. Croshere was never as good or as important as Roy even is now, let alone if he ever improved anymore. A backup PF we thought could be the starter. WE ALREADLY KNOW ROY CAN START BECAUSE HE IS BETTER AND MORE VALUABLE THE CROSHERE EVER WAS, and center is much more valuable spot to have a good player than a PF. So don't waste anyone's time with such a silly comparison.

You're continuing to rationalize; assuming Roy will disappoint or get hurt, that the team won't do well with him back, and present the only alternative to be this fantasy where we make these great moves to stay as good or better than last year even without Roy and we win 80% of our early games. That's a false dichotomy.

So the "watch the fan reaction" cuts BOTH WAYS. Everything in these scenarios depends on results, not the initial action. If the choice works then fans will be happy, if the choice flops then fans will be mad, period. So make the choice you (TPTB) feel most comfortable with and fans-be-damned.

Then we're simply back to basketball decisions, not appeasing fans, which I get and I'm fine with. I still say it's a bad idea.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

I was only jesting about trading him immediately after signing him. Yes, I think you could match and trade him in a year if that's what they wanted to do. He'd still bring in good value, and at least you wouldn't lose him for nothing.

I thought the Pacers have already been that route.... or is there a new Scot Pollard hiding out there we don't know about?

You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

What I'm saying is that if you put consolidations of talent in the SAME TERMS of the "Roy value" discussion, then OBVIOUSLY any NBA team would push their mother in front of a bus for the chance to swap (1 AS) Dwight for (2 AS) Roy and Danny.

Who the hell agreed those were the terms? You're speaking nonsense as far as I can tell. This 'all all-stars have equally value' talk is nonsense. I never said that or otherwise intended to imply such a silly thing.

IMO spreading Roy out as more bench talent and less starters talent makes sense because the team is in no-mans-land now, halfway between consolidated and deep. Balanced starters but no star, and yet as the playoffs showed there really isn't much bench depth. So you are losing at the top end and the deep bench end. You have no point of advantage in terms of top end or deep.

If Barbosa, Tyler and Lou had given teams fits in the playoffs it would be different, but that's not what happened. What we thought was a strength started looking like a weakness.

WE ARE IN A POSITION TO KEEP OUR STARTING FIVE AND STILL IMPROVE THE BENCH.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

If I could recover from the Detlef trade at the point in his career/Pacer star status, then you guys can recover from losing Roy now. It doesn't have to mean the end of the world.

The thing is, It's NOT a matter of whether I CAN recover from the loss of Roy, it's a matter of me NOT WANTINGto recover from it ...
Given all the known variables, I would find it totally unacceptable for the Pacers not to match Portland's offer ... PERIOD, end of story ...

Ya'll can think what you want about my reaction and what it will be if Roy isn't a Pacer come opening tip-off, but I am deadset in my mind on this and my conviction is strong..

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

Ana make no mistake, he's the gm, DW may be president, but certainly fror now, KP is makingthe decisions on players

Really? They give Donnie higher rank than Pritchard, he's obviously Herb's guy first and foremost, Walsh made it abundantly clear they're working together as a team (he and Pritchard) and that he's (Walsh) ultimately in charge, but you're going to go with this concept that it's in no way, shape, or form his responsibility as to what happens from here on? Really. Really.

So if you're going to stick with that, something I consider to be pure fantasy, you're basically endorsing him while he sits back playing the fiddle while Pritchard sets Rome on fire. Unbelievable.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to duke dynamite For This Useful Post:

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

Honestly I could care less at "overspending" at this point for Roy. It's not like we're getting any superstar to come here anyways and fat lot of good having cap space did us this summer every top free agent who was banging the "want to be competitive and go to best situation and get money" sure look like a bunch of hypocrites right now. It's a ****** situation because of who we are and where we are we have to keep our own players who got us to where we are at and hope beyond hope that someone on our team improves like crazy. Anyone is advocating for us to let Roy go on account that we could spend that money elsewhere on someone else later is just

*removed*

. It didn't get us anywhere this summer it's not going to later when we're an even less attractive of a draw than we are now cause we let Roy walk. Unless we draft the next Michael Jordan we're never going to have a superstar on this team. I had a glimmer of hope for this offseason given the cirucmstances but that's pretty much been snuffed out.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

Have you looked at Kaman's injury history? In the four seasons preceding last year's strike-shortened season, he has played 56, 31, 76, 32 games. That's an average of 48.75 per year. At what salary is it a good investment to pay a player who averages not much more than half a season of play each year?

Well I found this blog write-up that certainly supports the negative view of Kaman from a Clips fan, kinda makes some pretty compelling cases to not pursue Kaman as much and maybe consider Roy more due to health.

While it would stand to reason that Kaman’s game and experience would help a team built around such young players win, that may not actually be the case. The numbers just don’t show the team playing very well with him in the lineup. According to 82games.com, the vast majority of the Clippers successful five-man units have DeAndre, not Kaman, at center.
Kaman’s shooting ability would suggest that he’s an ideal post partner for Griffin, but he also still has a tendency to be indecisive with the ball and his turnover rate is not much better than Jordan’s. While his skill set fits in theory, it’s conceivable that the Clippers decide to shop him for the elusive small forward they have been seeking or some combination of assets.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

I do not understand how Portland can do the Pacers a favor. The Pacers are the only team that can offer him 5 years and more than $58 million. If they think the offer Portland will be making is already overpaying why would they even consider going higher? What leverage do Roy and his agent have to demand even more money? Refuse to play or take the qualifing offer might do him more harm than good.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

Hey, I can relate. I thought I could live with Gordon and Villanueva, too...

There's really no comparison between Villanueva and McGee. One's a buttery-soft tweener; the other is an efficient, 24-year-old double-double machine, who's also one of the league's elite shot blockers.

As for Mayo, as long as the contract's reasonable -- say, $7M per-season -- I'll be pleased with the signing. I trust that our management is smart enough not to offer him $11M per-season as Dumars did with Ben Gordon.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

Who the hell agreed those were the terms? You're speaking nonsense as far as I can tell. This 'all all-stars have equally value' talk is nonsense. I never said that or otherwise intended to imply such a silly thing.

WE ARE IN A POSITION TO KEEP OUR STARTING FIVE AND STILL IMPROVE THE BENCH.

The case for $14m for Roy is that he's an all-star, that centers are hard to come by and that any team would greatly value the opportunity to pay Roy $14m because of those factors. This leads to the natural conclusion that a super-valuable guy (getting FAIR MARKET by the "match the offer" side) paired with another really strong, former AS SF, would make a strong case for a trade for a single AS center.

But I think when you put real names to this claimed Roy fair-market value things start to sound iffy. How can you pay a guy $14m if you're telling me he's not viewed as good enough to get a guy like Dwight when paired with Granger in a trade?

And if that deal can get done then I do think the Pacers should look at it.

As for options if you keep Roy, I'm not against keeping Roy and I keep saying that. I'm just mulling over the value add not just this year but the next couple of years. What if West continues to improve from the knee recovery and goes for 25-8 averages this year, wouldn't you want to keep him for 2-3 more years and wish you had the money to do so? What if a great player on one of these super teams isn't working out next season and they start looking for a team to absorb a bail out and change.

If you match Roy then you are buying into the team as Hill-Paul-Danny-West-Roy-DC-(one more guy). I loved what they could do at times this year so I'm not really against that as a future. I'm just concerned because it's a crossroads where you are committing to their own progress as the means for improvement to title status.

Roy and Paul could improve enough to get you there, but this is it, this is the moment of truth so to speak.

It's stupid not to question it a little and wonder if it's definitely the right thing to do. You are saying that the superstar the team needs is already here in the form of Roy. Roy showed nice signs, but "superstar" or regular all-star signs? I don't think he's come close to showing Smits' level of consistency and offensive threat.

There's really no comparison between Villanueva and McGee. One's a buttery-soft tweener; the other is an efficient, 24-year-old double-double machine, who's also one of the league's elite shot blockers.

As for Mayo, as long as the contract's reasonable -- say, $7M per-season -- I'll be pleased with the signing. I trust that our management is smart enough not to offer him $11M per-season as Dumars did with Ben Gordon.

There is. You just dont want to see it.

That's fine. I didn't want to see it, either...

Putting down a large chunk of cash for two young talented backups is nice...but in the end, you're still paying for backups.

And if you don't think either guy is going to get massively overpaid, you don't understand the situation.

It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

Honestly I could care less at "overspending" at this point for Roy. It's not like we're getting any superstar to come here anyways and fat lot of good having cap space did us this summer every top free agent who was banging the "want to be competitive and go to best situation and get money" sure look like a bunch of hypocrites right now.

Nash and EJ came here to talk. They weren't offered as much money as they took elsewhere.

Neither said "F Indianapolis, I'd take less to play elsewhere". Both said "well your team is good enough but so are other teams and they want to pay me more". If the Pacers threw a 3/39m at Nash he'd be a Pacer right now without a doubt. And as it was the Lakers had to give up 2 first round picks, one of which might have good value in a few years.

If the Pacers said "we are bailing on Roy because we want a superstar and we think Nash fits the bill", they'd have him. Dwight has been crying for the Nets for more than a year, and that includes ignoring LA too, so I don't think anyone had a shot at him. He's in love with the idea of Brooklyn which is one reason to not want him anyway, he's not focused on a title as much as a marketing situation.

The Pacers did the same thing with the other FAs as they've done so far with Roy - they've strongly mulled over what a fair, smart price is in order to be the best they can be within the cap limits.

Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

We were abe to sincierely talk to the guy that didn't want to be here, the guy New Orleans is matching with a max contract, and an inferior center who can't help our defense the way Roy did. Woo hoo!

Thank-you for saying it, I was just about to.

So should I get the custom jersey that says CAP SPACE or ABLE TO SINCERELY TALK? I guess that wont fit, might have to go with SINCERELY TALK, huh?

"Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

"Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire"Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider